Wednesday, March 23, 2016
In Act 2, we learn some more about the characters besides Torvald and Nora. Nils Krogstad, the man employed to Torvald at the bank as a lawyer, is revealed to be directly involved in Nora's secrets. He was the one who helped her obtain the money and now reveals that he also has a document with Nora's father's signature which was forged by Nora. This was the same crime which Krogstad was apparently exposed in committing and it gives him a considerably powerful card to play. I enjoy Krogstad as a character because he comes off as a straight-forward villain, but has some more to him. "Even a mere cashier, a scribbler, a-well, a man like me, has a certain amount of what is called 'feeling', you know." Pg. 197, which is meant to remind Nora that she and Torvald are not the only ones who have to survive and keep their reputations and livelihoods in tact. Nora must find a constant solution of suppressing any knowledge of her actions from reaching him, which proves much easier than you'd imagine. Krogstad is given much more importance throughout the Act as the force to keep Nora on her toes and the story moving. Nora is unperturbed by the end as she soon resolves to end her life out of desperation, which leaves us hanging on the edge.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I love how you pointed out that Krogstad comes off as a straightforward villain but has some more to him. I keep forgetting that there's more to him. All I see is him blackmailing Nora and I don't see the good in him. I think that there just might be a few things that this play teaches us. 1. DON'T forge your parent's signature, 2. There's more than to what meets the eye and 3. Don't eat too many macaroons
ReplyDeleteI agree that Krogstad has more side to him than him just being a "villain." He comes off mean just because in the beginning we saw him black mailing Nora. Soon we come to realize in act II that he is more than that, he knows now that what he did was actually wrong.
ReplyDeleteI have said this on other peoples' blogs, and I will say it again here, but you mention Krogstad as being a villain; I disagree. He has lost his job to his ex-lover who he believes did him wrong, and he is bitter that his past mistakes keep throwing him down and that he can't get a second chance. Krogstad is a character that channels his spite towards Nora in the form of blackmail (his plan isn't bad either), and I believe that that is the only relatively evil characteristic that he possesses since he has since changed from his previous crimes. Besides that, I don't think that "villain" is an appropriate title for this peculiar character.
ReplyDeleteI persoally feel the same as krogstad has done some very devilish things ,however in my opinion despite him blackmailing her i believe that there is a more nicer side to him as he is only trying to protect himself from not losing his job. as stated in the book he is currecntly in the process of beginning a new life
ReplyDeleteI persoally feel the same as krogstad has done some very devilish things ,however in my opinion despite him blackmailing her i believe that there is a more nicer side to him as he is only trying to protect himself from not losing his job. as stated in the book he is currecntly in the process of beginning a new life
ReplyDeleteI disagree that Krogstad is a villain. I understand that he is blackmailing Nora but he's doing it out of desperation, just like Nora wanting to commit suicide. Krogstad has been through a lot and what ever he did, he did for his family, I'm assuming. You don't just willing commit forgery if you didn't think that it would help someone. In the play it mentions he has children and so with his actions, he is just taking care of them. Wouldn't any parent do what think was right in order to take care of their kids? I mean I would. So in Krogstad's defense, he isn't a villain, just a desperate man wanting to start fresh.
ReplyDeleteI commented on Dolly Housy, Rushika's Doll House, Danger in the Doll House, D.O.L.L.H.O.U.S.E I see things that nobody else sees and Michaela's Doll House Blog.
ReplyDeleteIt's funny how at one point in time you'll see or even try to see the good in a person. And that's that's what happened in Krogstad situation. I agree with you and like how you made your point across.
ReplyDeleteI like the fact that you mentioned how Krogstad had more to him than that of a typical villain. Although he was (somewhat) the antagonist of this play, if you look at it what he did wasn't completely horrible or immoral. He made a bad decision to commit forgery earlier in life, and now he needs to try and prove that he can be a good member of society again. It was Nora's fault for forging a signature, so there definitely is more to Krogstad than it may seem.
ReplyDelete